PARIS EXHIBITION OF 1878. 



SPEECH 



OF 



HON. ABRAM S. HEWITT, 



OF NEW YORK, 



IN THE 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



NOVEMBEB 19, 1877. 



*0ikx 




WASHINGTON. 
1877. 






A*« u 



SPEECH 

OF 

HON. ABEAM S. HEWITT 



The House being in Committee of the "Whole and having under consideration 
the joint resolution (H. K. No. 48) in relation to the international industrial expo- 
sition to be held in Paris in 1878 — 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York, said : 

Mr. Chairman : My colleague [Mr. Cox] has brought his unrivaled 
powers of sarcasm and the grace of his unequaled style and that wide 
reading, which has made him distinguished in literature as well as 
in politics, to hear against this measure, not of local significance, not 
of personal or of individual interest, but of the widest international 
importance. In the course of it he has directed the battery of his wit 
against one of his own colleagues. I accept it graciously. If he can 
stand it, I suppose that I can. But he has gone beyond the proper 
line of discretion when he attacks the most enterprising, the most 
honorable, the most useful men of the great city which he in com- 
mon with other gentlemen on this floor has the honor to represent. 
He seems to regard it as a crime to have achieved wealth and posi- 
tion in his desire to make himself popular with a class of the com- 
munity whom he claims to represent, but whom I declare he misrep- 
resents. 

Mr. COX, of New York. Speak for your own district 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I have as good a right to speak for 
the gentleman's district as he has, for while I live in my district he 
does not live in his. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, if such arguments can weigh against the 
merits of this bill, let it fail ; but I have too much respect for the 
good sense of the members of this House and for the intelligence of 
the American people, whom they represent, to suppose that my col- 
league's speech will do more than afford a little harmless amusement. 

This invitation comes before the House in the most formal manner 
possible. It comes from the President or" the United States in a 
message directed to Congress in special session, and therefore must 
have been regarded by him as a matter of the gravest public moment 
The invitation comes to us from the great European republic, a re- 
public of thirty-six millions of people addressed to the great Ameri- 
can Republic, a Republic of forty-three millions of people. And it 
comes to us, sir, after we had addressed a similar invitation to 
them. In 1873, the President of the United States, by the direct in- 
struction of Congress, invited the nations of the world to take part 
in our great exposition designed to commemorate the centennial of 
American Independence. That invitation was addressed to France, 
and France, bound to us by ties of sympathy and the traditions of 
ancient friendship, was not slow to signify her acceptance. Thirty- 



eight of the nations of the world accepted that invitation. Now 
France, in her turn, asks the nations of the world to come and assist 
at her exposition, and the only one, excepting those which are pre- 
vented by political considerations, who stands back, the only laggard 
in the great array of nations, is the Kepublic whose sympathy, not 
merely because we are both republics, she ought to have, but because 
France alone of the nations of Europe aided us in the days of our 
weakness and in the hour of trial. 

Let it be remembered, Mr. Chairman, that the invitation of 1873 
was not the first invitation that this nation addressed to France. In 
1776, by a vote of Congress, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, 
and Silas Deane, three names illustrious in American history, were 
dispatched to convey an invitation to France. That invitation 
was to furnish us with arms, money, and men in the death-struggle 
upon which we had entered. When those commissioners arrived, 
Arthur Lee, who had preceded them, had already met the French min- 
ister, and had succeeded in freighting three vessels, by the aid of 
money from the French treasury, with cargoes of tents, with arms, 
and other munitions of war necessary to maintain the unequal con- 
flict in which we were then engaged. It was, sir, upon the contents of 
those vessels that the continental army was enabled to get ready to 
cope with the forces of Great Britain. Subsequently, Franklin and 
Deane — Jefferson being absent on account of the illness of his wife — 
appeared before the French government and asked for their aid. At 
that moment France was involved in the greatest pecuniary distress, 
and yet, while they could not do much for us, they gave $400,000 out 
of their treasury, which was at once invested in arms and ammuni- 
tion and sent to this country. 

More than that, they compelled the fwmiers generaux of the taxes to 
loan $200,000 more, which in like manner found its way in the shape 
of munitions of war into the beleaguered colonies. 

But there was an incident still more remarkable : The governor of 
Metz, a fortress then as now, renowned in war, gave a dinner to the 
Duke of Gloucester, a brother of the British King. At his table a 
young man, nineteen years of age, but a brilliant officer, heard from 
the lips of this royal personage the story of the resistance of the 
American colonies to the mother-land. That youthful heart was fired. 
He went to Paris, approached Benjamin Franklin, and told him that he 
wanted to fight in the cause of freedom. He applied to his govern- 
ment for leave to go to America, but was refused, because it was not 
yet ready to take an open part against the great power of England. 

But in despite of that he purchased a vessel with his own money, 
freighted it with arms and invited eleven experienced officers, among 
whom was the veteran De Kalb, to accompany him to America. He 
left his bride ; he left his unborn child ; he eluded the pursuit of the 
English, and instead of going to the West Indies as they expected, he 
sailed directly for New York, where he landed, thence proceeded with- 
out delay to Philadelphia and tendered his services, his fortune, his 
life to the cause of the American nation. That offer was accepted, 
and La Fayette became a member of the military family of Washing- 
ton, and did more than any other man, next to the Father of his 
Country, for the great cause to which our patriotic fathers had de- 
voted " their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.' 7 

Then in 1778 followed the two treaties with France negotiated by 
Franklin. The first was a treaty of amity and friendship, offensive 
and defensive, by which the French nation agreed that they would 
carry on the war with Great Britain until American independence 



was secured. The second was even more important in view of the 
history or" our commercial development, which has justified the fore- 
sight of the greatest name in our history next to that of Washington. 
By that treaty the French government agreed that the war should 
he carried on until America had secured mercantile freedom as well 
as political independence. Those two treaties secured the independ- 
ence of this country. That we are here to-day talking as freemen 
upon this floor is due to the fact that France cast her heavy hand 
into the scale during that momentous struggle for life and liberty. 

These treaties were followed by shipments of money, shipments of 
munitions of war, and, what is mere important, by shipments of men. 
A great fleet was sent over to the American coast which prevented 
the British fleet from ravaging along our shores. D'Estaing, Rocham- 
beau, De Grasse, and others whose names can never be forgotten 
while the American heart feels any gratitude toward the people who 
secured its freedom, took part in the conflict and never rested, and 
the final success was achieved. 

When Washington was on his way to Yorktown and the Army came 
to Philadelphia, not knowing whither they were bound, a spirit of 
rebellion broke out among those tired patriots who had marched 
barefooted across the Jerseys. There was no cash in the public 
Treasury ; they had not been paid for months ; the device of conti- 
nental money had broken down, audits value had gone out of sight. 
Robert Morris, the man of infinite resources, was applied to in this 
emergency, but he declared with sorrow his inability to do anything. 
Then Count Rochambeau went to his military chest and took out 
$20,000 — a small sum now, but in the days of the Revolution, when 
paper money had been swept away, it was an amount beyond the 
dreams of avarice — he took twenty thousand silver dollars out of that 
military chest, and with that sum of money the men were quieted and 
the march for Yorktown proceeded. 

At that juncture, as if in the providence of God, Henry Laurens 
landed in Boston with $500,000 in specie which had been paid over 
to him by the French government as the fruits of a loan made to 
Benjamin Franklin for ten million livres. In addition to this $500,000 
another loan which had been negotiated with Holland was guaranteed 
by the French government of an additional ten million of livres. With 
this $500,000 the army which marched upon Yorktown was thoroughly 
equipped and made ready to do the great work which was before it. 

And when Yorktown capitulated how stood the army ? There were 
nine thousand American soldiers and seven thousand French soldiers 
who divided between them the honor of that memorable and decisive 
capitulation. The French fleet had prevented Cornwallis from re- 
tiring, so that the possibility of the achievement was due to our 
French allies alone. 

I seek not to recite history, but to revive memories which, though 
familiar as household words to schoolboys, are apt to be slumbering 
in the dim recollections of older men, engrossed by the busy cares of 
life and politics ; but such was the invitation that our fathers gave 
to France ; such was the response which France made to our fathers. 
Now, in her turn, France tenders an invitation to us. I know that 
after the grateful memories which I have endeavored to revive there 
is not a man in this House who will vote to decline that invitation. 
Even my colleague from New York [Mr. Cox] does not propose to 
disgrace his manhood so much as to say to this French nation, to 
whom we owe our political existence, " We will not accept your in- 
vitation." He does propose to say, however, " We will accept it but 
will spend no money upon it." 



6 

Suppose that when Franklin and Deane and Laurens and the other 
American commissioners went to that courtly and polite nation and 
delivered their invitation, the reply had been made to them : " We ac- 
cept your invitation ; we sympathize with your struggles ; we admire 
your courage ; we feel the prof oundest interest in your success ; but 
money is another question, we cannot spend any money ; our finances 
are embarrassed ; we are on the brink of ruin ; we will give you our 
sympathy but you can have no money." Where then would have been 
our Independence, the one hundredth anniversary of which we asked 
France, first and most of all, to aid us in celebrating ? 

Sir, it is to belittle this whole question beyond measure to put it 
upon a money ground. This money will not be expended for the ben- 
efit of France. Every dollar of this expenditure will be made for the 
benefit of our own people, and is an indispensably necessary expendi- 
ture based upon the fact that we accept the invitation at all. 

My colleague asks, " Why does not private enterprise take up this 
matter ?" The exhibition of 1851, he says, was a private enterprise ; 
the exhibition of 1862 a private enterprise ; and he might have added 
that the exhibition in Philadelphia was a private enterprise, for I 
heard him frequently declare that it was, giving that as a reason why 
he could not vote for the loan asked from Congress. But the reason 
an appropria tion by the Government is asked for this exhibition is 
simply because it is not a private enterprise, and private enterprise 
will not be permitted by France to take charge of the American par- 
ticipation in the exhibition. It is a national enterprise, and France 
in its national character has invited the people of the United States 
in their national capacity to take part in it. Private individuals have 
gone and knocked at the door of France, asking to be admitted and 
bear the expense themselves ; and they have been told, " We can recog- 
nize no one but your Government." This is the answer to that most 
disingenuous suggestion of my colleague. It is not possible for pri- 
vate enterprise to take up and deal with this question. It is purely 
an international affair ; and if our citizens are to take part at all, it 
must be done through the agency of their Government. 

Now, when the Government accepts the invitation it must send a 
representative. That representative must incur expenses. Who 
shall pay those expenses ? The representative himself ? Again when 
the articles arrive in Paris they must be arranged; they must be in- 
stalled in their place. Expenses must be incurred for fitting up the 
space assigned to us, for interpreters, clerks, draymen, and an infi- 
nite variety of other matters. It is very true that the exhibitors 
might pay these expenses ; I have no doubt they would cheerfully do 
so, if asked or allowed. But the complication and difficulty which 
would be caused by assessing these charges upon a thousand, or ten 
thousand exhibitors would be so great that the confusion would be- 
come intolerable, and the work would not be done at all. For that 
reason provision must be made for these expenditures by the Govern- 
ment. 

Now, whether this provision shall be on the scale of $50,000 or 
$100,000 or $150,000 is a matter of comparatively little consequence, 
except that we should throw away no money. It is not necessary 
that we should throw away any. We have the experience of two 
exhibitions to guide us, and we know just what the cost ought to be. 
The appropriation for the French exhibition of 1867 was very much 
larger than the expenditures, which were about $140,000. The ex- 
penditures for the Vienna exhibition were about $160,000. At Vienna 
there was doubtless some waste. There certainlv was a scandal 



which it is reserved for my colleague to revive when every patriotic 
American would gladly have forgotten it ; but it was a scandal that 
had nothing to do with expositions or questions of exposition. It 
had to do with the bad conduct of Americans themselves. "We pro- 
pose — at least we hope — this time to exhibit a better class of Ameri- 
cans than we exhibited there, and I shall be very much surprised if 
the lessons then learned shall fail to admonish the President to select 
no political partisans or mere dilettante pretenders for the serious 
and responsible duties of commissioners, and I indulge the hope that 
not only men duly qualified will be appointed with especial reference 
in each case to some special work, but that a knowledge of the 
French language will be regarded as an indispensable prerequisite to 
appointment at all. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, a word or two as to the advantages of taking 
part in these exhibitions. I have shown that in common courtesy 
we cannot decline to participate. But we ought not to decline, even 
if no question of courtesy were involved. In the first place, these 
exhibitions are great industrial universities. They teach a class of 
people that have very few other opportunities to learn. More than 
that, they teach nations their deficiencies, and how to supply those 
deficiencies. I do not exaggerate when I say that the French exhibi- 
tion of 1867 contributed to this country an amount of wealth which 
it is very difficult to estimate. 

The single matter of Bessemer steel has been referred to. That 
commodity, now indispensable for the operations and economy of 
railway transportation, was then made by very few concerns, and 
was sold at a very high price. About $160 a ton was the cost at that 
time. It was very difficult to procure information in regard to proc- 
esses of manufacture. Americans particularly were excluded from 
the European steel-works. But when that exhibition took place the 
products of those great establishments were exhibited; and it forms 
part of the implied condition of exhibition that the processes shall 
be explained to the commissioners, and particularly to the jurors. 
In that way and under that rule, I, who had the honor to be a com- 
missioner, was enabled to visit and examine all the great Bessemer 
steel works in Europe. But I was enabled to do much more. 

The door was opened to a great many American engineers and me- 
chanics who were there anxious to study that important subject. The 
result was that the manufacture of Bessemer steel was — I will not say, 
introduced into this country, because we had already one establish- 

f.ent in operation, but it was undertaken with a better knowledge. 
11 the most recent appliances were brought into use ; all the econo- 
mies and peculiarities of the business were comprehended. The result 
has been that in less than ten years from that time we have erected 
and have to-day in operation ten Bessemer steel works ; enough to pro- 
duce five hundred thousand tons of steel rails per annum — more than 
the annual consumption of the country. "We are absolutely independ- 
ent of the foreign supply ; and the price has been reduced from $160 
a ton to $40 a ton, at which sales have been made within the last 
month. Bessemer steel rails are to-day sold at lower prices than the 
price of iron rails previous to the exhibition of 1867. 

Now, I do not pretend that if there had been no exhibition we 
should not have learned how to make Bessemer steel ; I do not pre- 
tend that we should not have built these works in the course of time ; 
but I do say, and no man can contradict it, that by the experience of 
that exhibition we gained at least five years in the introduction of 
this great branch of human industry and its growth to its present 
vast dimensions. 



8 

I give that case only as a sample. The time at my command does* 
not allow me to go into any detail. But I will mention one thing 
which has been suggested to me by the words of my colleague. He 
says that the great Corliss engine was not the fruit of the exhibition 
of 1876. It existed before that. Yes, in 1867 it existed, and I saw 
a Corliss engine in the French exhibition of that year around which 
stood crowds of engineers and mechanics who studied its peculiari- 
ties and recognized its merits. What was the result? The Corliss 
engine to-day is built in every civilized country in Europe on a 
large scale, driving out all other engines and paying a royalty to the 
inventor of that beautiful machine. The same thing is true, sir, of 
our agricultural tools. Prior to 1867 they were but little known in 
Europe. They were introduced to public notice by that great trial 
which took place near the exhibition, in which Walter Wood's reaper 
cut down the grass almost before the other people could harness up 
their horses to make a start. This is a ridiculous business, according 
to my colleague from New York ! If he had heard the cheer which 
went up from that great American crowd when Walter Wood's 
reaper cut down that grass he would have thought there was some- 
thing in the American heart besides laughter and ridicule. 

He is pleased to devote a great deal of his time, and I regret to say 
too much of his undoubted talents, to the derision of Indian corn. 
Well, if he had chosen to read history for the purpose of advocating 
this measure, instead of casting ridicule upon it, he would have found 
that many American products and many new vegetables now used 
for food have been brought into use within a couple of hundred years 
by efforts very much of the kind which I have recommended. For 
example, take the potato. It was made known to Europeans by Sir 
Walter Raleigh barely two hundred years ago, and it did not get in- 
troduced into France until just before the French revolution. Then 
a great chemist, M. Parmentier, devoted himself to the task of intro- 
ducing the potato to the French people. He went through many ex- 
periments. He was ridiculed. There is a statue standing to him 
now, but he was ridiculed then. It was asserted that the introduc- 
tion of the potato into France was the cause of some diseases then 
prevalent, and Parmentier was accused of being a public enemy. But 
Louis XVI, taking an interest in all practical questions, finally came 
to the aid of Parmentier. A great public dinner was given in Paris 
and the potato was the staple of the dinner. There were sixteen kinds 
of dishes of the potato in honor of the King, who was the sixteenth 
Louis. The King appeared, and instead of the customary bouquet ^ 
of flowers he wore in his button-hole a bunch of potato-blossoms. From* 
that hour the potato was acclimatized, and I suppose the gentleman, 
who has been in Paris, knows that the French excel in serving up 
very delicate dishes of that admirable esculent. Of course Parmen- 
tier is now a benefactor ; then he was the public enemy. 

Such is the history of all progress. The same thing is true of cof- 
fee, of tea, of chocolate, of tobacco, and of many other things which 
are now in extensive use either as articles of necessity or of luxury. 
I have not time to go over the history of them all, but those who are 
curious can find the facts for themselves in Disraeli's Curiosities of 
Literature. t^^Z 

The object of singling out Indian corn is this : It is the greatest of 
the American cereal products. This year (my authority is the Com- 
missioner of Agriculture) the product will propably amount to thir- 
teen hundred and fifty million bushels. The exportation last year 
was about sixty million bushels. It was used mostly for food for 
animals. 



9 

It is unnecessary in this House to discuss the fact that Indian corn 
is as nutritious as wheat, or nearly so ; that it is a most palatable 
article of food, which is unknown in Europe, notwithstanding what 
my colleague has said, practically unknown, for, except along the 
limited area of the Danube, a portion of Turkey, the south of France, 
a portion of Italy, and on the shores of Africa, you find this cereal is 
not cultivated at all. If it could be introduced as an article of food, 
the exportation would undoubtedly run up from sixty million bushels 
per annum to a very large amount, possibly to two or three hundred 
million bushels per annum. 

Now, who is to be benefited by this ? Is it the speculators of New 
York ? It is surely the farmers — the farmer everywhere, from New 
England to Georgia, from the 4-tlantic to the Pacific coast, for our 
whole country practically is a corn-growing region. 

I am perfectly willing to admit, Mr. Chairman, that the idea of 
establishing a kitchen in a great exhibition at first sight appears 
somewhat ludicrous. I was perfectly aware of this when the sug- 
gestion was first made, but it is a practical idea, and a practical idea 
which we have seen tried in previous expositions. For example, 
take the Vienna bakery, first at Paris, then at Philadelphia. Every 
man knows what a benefaction that has been to the people of this 
country. We are getting better bread every day ; and the man who 
produces good bread for the people is the greatest benefactor of that 
people. No greater service can be rendered by any possible exercise 
of human ingenuity. 

I did not expect that amendment would be reported ; I rather hoped 
it would not be. It has gained the object I had in view. It has di- 
r ected the public attention to this question ; and if I had time I could 
produce innumerable letters from all parts of the land commending 
the idea, and these letters as a rule come from the most enlightened, 
progressive, and public-spirited citizens we have in the country. I 
trust that this idea will not be abandoned ; that the commissioner- 
general will take such measures as, in his judgment, may be neces- 
sary to introduce more widely a knowledge of our American cereals, 
and enlarge and widen their European market. And I am quite will- 
ing to stake what little personal reputation may survive after I pass 
away, upon the fact, if it should succeed, that Indian corn has come 
into general use as well for the benefit of our European neighbors as 
to the great advantage of our own country by reason of the action of 
this Congress on this subject. 

„ Now, Mr. Chairman, I have spoken briefly of what we may possi- 
bly learn at this exposition. I come now to the second, and. much 
more important part of this discussion, and that is, what we may sell 
by taking part in this exposition. I am free to admit that owing to 
previous expositions we nave learned so much that if this question 
depended merely upon what we might learn at the coming exposition 
I might have some doubts as to the necessity of taking part in it ; 
but we have arrived in this country at a stage of development very 
different from that which existed in 1867. We were then unable to 
produce enough to supply our own wants except in the article of 
food. Now, owing very largely to these exhibitions, we have enlarged 
our manufacture so that there is no staple article we do not to-day 
produce in this country to a sufficient extent to supply the home de- 
mand and we have a surplus for exportation to the rest of the world. 
What we need to do more than any other thing for the revival of pros- 
perity (except it be a sound currency, and that we are coming to and 
have almost reached) is a foreign market for our surplus products. 
That foreign market we can only get in two ways : first, we must 



10 

make known the excellence of our products. That we can do by- 
showing them to the assembled world and this exhibition at Paris is 
the very opportunity we desire, and it comes exactly at that point 
of time which we ourselves would have selected if we had the power 
to do it. 

in addition to the excellence of what we have to sell we must be 
able to sell at a price that will compete with other nations. In many 
things we are able to do so to-day, but in many other commodities 
we are not able to do it, and the reason is because the raw material 
which enters into the composition of these manufactured articles is 
oppressed by high duties, and as it is necessary to import much raw 
material from abroad our domestic manufactures are hampered and 
inj ured — not improved, not encouraged — by such duties. We want 
to sweep away all such obstructions and impediments, and in order 
to accomplish this desirable result our manufacturers themselves 
must go and see what the necessities of the case demand in order 
that they may get possession of these foreign markets. 

And just here let me say my colleague has quoted an extract from 
the report I made in 1867 — a most unfair quotation ; but let that 
pass. The point of that quotation was this: I was contrasting the 
moral, social, and physical condition of the foreign laborer with that 
of the American laborer, and I showed how, in the exercise of unlimited 
competition — not here, but there — in European countries, unrestrained 
by local laws as to the use of labor in the employment of women and 
children in work which should be reserved for men, labor had been 
ground down, oppressed, and reduced to unnatural rates which should 
never have existed. I said it was against such labor as that we could 
not compete, and that it was necessary to enact laws there — not here, 
but there — for the protection of those laborers so they might enjoy 
the common rights of man. That quotation which was in the inter- 
est of humanity — humanity there as well as here — this gentleman 
turns upon me as evidence that I am a protectionist. With what 
propriety my colleague has made this charge the whole passage, 
which I now insert, will show. Speaking in my report on the French 
exposition of the progress of British legislation in reference to the 
working classes, I said : 

In no country in the world are so many proofs of the wisdom of this course to be 
found as in the history of British legislation in reference to the working classes for 
the last thirty-five years. The repeal of the corn laws was a measure of eminent 
protection to the working classes, relieving them of the taxes imposed upon food 
for the benefit of the land-owner alone, because the condition of the agricultural 
laborer could not be made worse, but could only be improved by any change. The 
series of laws regulating the employment of women and children in factories and 
mines are not merely highly restrictive, but by common consent have produced the 
happiest results on the moral and physical condition of the working classes. The 
laws recognizing the legal existence of friendly societies ; for the encouragement of 
building associations ; the conversion of the post-offices into savings-banks for the 
working classes ; for the granting of annuities and life insurance guaranteed by 
the government to the working classes on the payment of small periodical install- 
ments; for the encouragement of co-operative stores and associations; for "part- 
nerships of industry" in which, the workman is allowed to have an interest in the 
profits of the business, without becoming liable as a partner for the debts ; the 
statutes authorizing the establishment of free reading-rooms, libraries, and mu- 
seums by a vote of the rate-payers in any borough, town, or city ; constitute a 
course of wise legislation unmistakably protective, restrictive, and enabling; per- 
sistently advocated and successfullv established by the most sagacious, liberal, 
and philanthropic statesmen of the present age, and resulting in so marked an 
improvement in the condition of the working classes, accompanied with so decided 
an advance in the rate of wages — 
Here comes the passage quoted by my colleague — 

that it is scarcely possible longer to deny, that the first step toward securing to 
the working classes an adequate reward for their labor is such legislation as pro- 



11 

tects them from the evils which seem to be inseparable from the spirit of unre- 
restrained competition between nations and between men, which experience has 
shown to resnlt in the utter disregard of the moral and physical condition and 
social welfare of the working classes, unless regulated by positive legal enactment. 

Now, this concluding sentence, thus unfairly cut off from its con- 
test in a statement which, has no reference whatever to the question 
of free trade and protection, but has relation solely to the social status 
and condition of the working classes, "because the word "protective" 
is used in describing English laws enacted for the benefit of the 
working classes — this concluding sentence my colleague quotes as 
the evidence that I am a protectionist. How fairly let this House 
and the country judge. I forbear to characterize such conduct, but 
I commend to the study of my colleague the recent letter of Judge 
Black to Mr. Stoughton, our new Kussian minister, in which Judge 
Black, speaking of a similar garbled quotation, says : 

In law this is not a forgery, but among men of average honesty the fraudulent 
alteration of a paper %> injure another's character passes for about as shameful 
and base a thing as can be done. 

And now I give my colleague his answer. I am not a high protec- 
tionist ; I have never been a high protectionist ; and I challenge my 
colleague to find one word in that report which advocates the pro- 
tective policy. It is not there. The facts are stated and the conclu- 
sions left to the judgment of an enlightened country to decide which 
policy should be adopted, whether the policy of free trade or the pol- 9 
icy of protection. X 

I now go farther and I say to my colleague, the time has come when 
protection has ceased to protect. I, who am a manufacturer, as largely 
engaged in manufactures as any gentleman certainly upon this floor, 
say that high duties are impediments to our progress, and I advocate 
taking part in this exposition because I think it will give the final 
blow to a system which, however useful it may have been in its day, 
has outlived its usefulness, and will tend to hasten that better state 
of things when the productions of all nations shall be exchanged as 
if they were the work of one family. I hope the gentleman is satis- 
fied with that declaration. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I quoted from the gentleman's report 
then. He has changed his idea since. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I submit to the gentleman that I did 
not interrupt him. It is evident that he has not heard my remarks. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I have heard the gentleman's remarks 
and I will replv to what he has said in the five-minutes debate. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. That relates only to the condition of 
labor in other countries. 

Mr. COX, of New York. You were a protectionist except as to 
wages. You said the wages were too low there. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I am not and never was a high, pro- 
tectionist at all. My friend from Pennsylvania, Judge Kelley, will 
tell you that I am not regarded as sound on this question. 

Mr. COX, of New York. But Judge Kelley is not regarded as 
sound on that question. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I never thought he was. 

Mr. O'NEILL. I should like to know who is sounder than Judge 
Kelley on that question ? 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I differ from the gentleman in regard 
to the views of Judge Kelley being sound. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I will say with the permission of the gen- 
tleman that when the question of Bessemer steel comes up 



12 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Hewitt] 
has the floor. Does he yield to his colleague ? 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Will this come out of my time? 

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. Then I do not yield. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I will explain the Bessemer-steel matter 
in my five minutes. 

Mr. BANKS. I rise to a question of order. The subject of protec- 
tion is not under debate. I want to hear the views of the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Hewitt] in relation to the Paris exposition. 

The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is not well taken. It seems 
to be the custom for members to exercise their own discretion as to 
the subjects discussed in Committee of the Whole on the state of the 
Union. The gentleman will proceed. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. I would not have discussed the ques- 
tion of protection but that my colleague misrepresented me on that 
point. 

Mr. COX, of New York. I did not attack my colleague, but drew 
from the exposition reports to show that we should have no more of 
that sort of thing. 

Mr. HEWITT, of New York. This exposition, Mr. Chairman, will 
afford a very unusual opportunity to enlarge the area of our market, 
because Germany, Russia, and Turkey are in such a situation that 
they can take no part in the exhibition ; Russia and Turkey because 
they are at war; Germany, not, as I have been erroneously reported to 
have said, because of feelings of "envy and hatred, but because of the 
political necessities of the position of Germany at this juncture. I 
think the present German government sympathizes with the French 
Republic, but the condition of affairs in France has been such that it 
is possible that an outbreak might occur at any moment which might 
force Germany to energetic steps for self -protection. For that reason 
she has declined to participate in this exhibition. But the Germans 
will all go to Paris to see what other people exhibit, and in the 
absence of their own exhibits they will give a most careful and pro- 
found study to the exhibition of American products. 

Now it is quite true that the people of the United States have never 
made a proper exposition of their products. At Paris it was very 
meager, although they did carry off a very undue proportion of prizes. 
In Vienna it was a little more extensive, but not such an exhibition 
as we ought to have made. At this time the whole country is alive 
to the importance of this exhibition, and for the first time we are 
going to show what we can do ; and I venture to predict that when 
we do show what we can do, as we did at Philadelphia, the prizes 
will fall to the lot of our exhibitors. In other words, wherever there 
is competition the American article will carry off the prize even in 
such products as cotton goods alongside of the French and the English 
competition. I venture to predict that our cotton trade, which 
within three years has grown from nothing up to $12,000,000 and this 
year promises to be $15,000,000 of exports, will be vastly extended by 
being brought into direct competition with English and French prod- 
ucts. Our cotton goods are coming into use even in England, and 
will come into use in France as soon as our commercial arrangements 
with that country will permit. 

One of the best fruits that will come out of this exhibition will be 
the fact that it will compel a revision of our commercial treaties with 
France. It is a disgrace to the diplomacy of this country that these 
treaties have been allowed to remain in their present condition. The 



13 

importance of a revision will be forced upon the attention of our 
Government ; it will be forced upon the attention of our people ; it 
will be forced, upon the attention of the French Government by the 
demands of their own population, and we shall have at last a system 
of reciproeity between the United States and France which will enor- 
mously increase our trade. 

Now, it seems to be the fashion to ridicule the increase of trade. I 
have been weak enough to suppose that one of the great objects 
we had in coming here was to promote the increase of trade. I 
have been weak enough to suppose that this very bill found its con- 
stitutional warrant under a provision of the Constitution the appli- 
cation of which to such bills has never been called in question. I 
have read the debates and I cannot find that any leading man has 
ever questioned the constitutionality of such appropriations — not 
even my colleague who was in Congress when they were made. I 
find that Congress has "the power to regulate commerce with foreign 
nations," and that is all there is of this thing. It is first a question of 
national courtesy — and that portion can be defended under the diplo- 
matic power — and, secondly, of enlarging commerce. 

Now, having but little time left, I wish to quote the testimony of 
M. Kuhlman Jils, one of the French commissioners, himself a most 
eminent chemist, as to the superiority of American natural forces and 
the skill with which we manage them. I read from his report upon 
the Philadelphia exhibition : 

The rapid examination which we made of products of the chemical arts in the 
exposition at Philadelphia established very clearly the remarkable development of 
this industry in the United States. We do not hesitate to say that this rapid prog- 
ress in manufactures appeared to all the members of our jury the most interesting 
and most characteristic feature of this exposition. ^ 

We do not exaggerate in saying that the soil of the United States contain thas 
elements of nearly all the great industry to a most extended degree. 

The mines of iron, copper, silver, and gold seem to offer inexhaustible resources. 

Petroleum, this great source of heat and light, has and will bring great wealth 
to that country. 

Coal, the vital element of all the industries, is found in vast quantities, and is 
easy of exploitation. It is estimated that the coal-basins cover more than ten 
millions of acres, and at Pittsburgh coal costs but $1 per ton. 

Anthracite, the exploitation of which represents one-third of the fuel extracted 
from the mines, enters largely in working iron-furnaces and conducting other met- 
allurgic operations. 

Furthermore, the means of transportation are admirably organized in the United 
States. The net- work of railroads represent upward of eighty thousand miles. 
Rivers traverse it in all directions, furnishing cheap transportation to coal and ores. 

Salt and sulphur are found as yet only to a limited extent ; but there is native 
sulphur and an abundance of pyrites in the United States, which must at some 
period play an important part in the chemical industry of that country. 

It is very evident that the industrial arts in America will not only very soon 
supply her own wants, but that there will come a time when the course of trade 
will be reversed and they will send to the Old World their excess of production. 
We would be amazed to see any cessation in the progress of that energetic nation, 
so enterprising and determined, (having faith in their institutions, which are in 
general well adapted to the nature of the people,) that seeks to educate all classes, 
and which has been blessed beyond all other nations by the variety and richness 
of their agricultural and mineral resources. 

That is the future predicted for us by intelligent foreigners. Sir, 
the resources of the country will meet amply these great expecta- 
tions. I for one wish to accelerate the coming of the time when these 
results shall be realized, and when the country which we represent 
shall occupy its legitimate rank at the head of the commercial and 
industrial nations of the world. Hence I urge the passage of this 
bill as a graceful act of courtesy and a wise measure of policy. 
[Here the hammer fell.] 



ImSSEL* CONGRESS 



019 945 820 J" | 



Conservation Resources 
Lig-Free® Type I 
Ph 8.5, Buffered 



